Could you explain yourself a little better?

 Reply

However, this issue is ultimately about the person carrying the fetus. If I, a citizen and a human, do not have control over pregnancy, then I am being punished for having a uterus. And that, in turn, effects ALL of my rights. A person that will be cannot trump the rights of the person who is.

But mostly, since you are a practical person, I will say this: abortion has existed as long as sex has. The legality of it has nothing to do with whether or not a woman will seek one. And it is impractical for a government to allow self administered abortion which kills women. The only choice the government has is whether or not to support the health and well being of women who will abort.

There's a moral argument to be made about drug use, and a health issue. The War on Drugs has failed because people will always find a way to get high (another thing that goes back to the beginning of humans). I don't mean to flippant about the analogy, but to me it holds. We've gotten nowhere dealing with drugs as a moral / punishing issue - because in reality, it's a health issue.

Let people debate morality, and let the government deal in the practical goal of protecting the health of the public.

 Reply

Is it such a terrible imposition to be inconvenienced for the 9 months it will take to bring this child to the world. I understand that there are circumstances where a person might not think they are capable of raising a child. Do adoption agencies turn people down? These are real questions. I am not trying to be snarky, or mean.

The morality debate seems to have been stalled. The "it's no big deal" crowd has seemingly taken away any argument at all.

@allyzay: I think you are being pessimistic at best and somewhat nihilistic at worse here. Every person is unique. I am not a "precious snowflake" type of person but I believe everyone has the right to live their life as best they can.

One of the things I love to do is find out what someone is passionate about and just listen to them talk about it. Whether it's NASCAR, painting, movies, or collecting paperweights in the shape of cats. I usually like it better when I have no real interest in the same subject. It is fascinating to listen to someone talk about something they are passionate about.

 Reply

And I'm not a person who thinks it's no big deal. Abortion is a very big deal for all involved. I just believe that the choice of women is paramount.

 Reply

If your husband's parents could have just driven down to planned parenthood and gotten an abortion then that person that you love would not exist. He would never have touched the lives that he has. He would never have friends, go to school, experience music, have a picnic, and he would never married you and given you, hopefully, so much love in your life. He may have not been a joy to his biological parents but he has given it to many other people.

He has had a unique life. He has been allowed to have that life.

Currently there are thousands of abortions every year in the U.S. alone. I would put up a specific number but the only actual tallies I seem to find have questionable bias.

That is thousands of people a year that never get the chance to experience life.

Also not to discount issues your husband may have with his being adopted, but isn't it better to be alive and have those problems than to not being alive?

Is adoption great? Not really.

Is it better than the alternative? Absolutely.

 Reply

But where your argument really breaks down for me is the practicality. Women have been terminating their own pregnancies for thousands of years, and will continue to do so regardless of the law. Making clinical abortions performed by competent professionals illegal does not remove choice, it only removes one option of many. Any woman who really wants to terminate a pregnancy will find a way; abortion is not done casually, for the most part it is done out of desperation. Without the option of safe clinical abortion on the table, women will have no choice but to turn to more dangerous methods to get what they need. For example, many women in Brazil (where abortion is illegal) are hospitalized due to massive complications from back-alley abortions, whose bodies have been damaged beyond repair because they did not have access to safer options. More info here (or all over the net): [www.ipas.org]

The fact that women are willing to risk serious injury or even death to terminate their pregnancies, rather than give birth, should tell you that abortion is a far more complex issue than selfish women not wanting to donate their wombs to a baby for a mere nine months because they don't want to be inconvenienced. You yourself admit that you don't and can't understand what it's like to carry a child. So how can you claim that your decision on the matter is the absolute right one for all pregnant women everywhere, regardless of their personal situations? I don't know what it means to be pregnant, either, and I don't know what it's like to have to consider abortion. That is exactly why I am the LEAST qualified to make the decision for everyone who IS in that position.

I feel like your heart's in the right place, and I agree with your ideas about why abortion is wrong, but I don't understand why you feel that your uninformed opinion qualifies you to decide what should be law, and I don't believe you understand exactly what you'd be sentencing women to if your opinion WERE to be made law.

 Reply

My opinion counts because we are talking about the termination of a life. I would not stand by while a baby crawls into the street. I would not stand by and watch someone abuse their child. The only difference between a fetus and a baby are a few ticks of the clock.

Making abortion illegal will probably not happen. I understand that and can even see a need for it in some cases. The problem is the overwhelming number of abortions now happening. As I said earlier the pro-choice argument too often comes across as "It's no big deal". It too often sounds like a petulant teenager who wants a belly ring screaming "it's my body".

I understand that is not the sentiment you subscribe to but there seems to be little to no respect or consideration for the fetus from the pro-choice movement. I probably blame this on the incendiary nature of the discussion. A little more care in the words used would do both parties a world of good.

Abortion should be a last resort, not just another option. It has become far too common to "deal" with a pregnancy rather than prevent one.

 Reply

Saying that the best option is to force women who are pregnant against their will to give birth against their will is not going to solve the problem. Is that really how your money, time and energy are best spent? Aren't there better goals that could be addressed? I wish I could go up to every single pregnant woman considering abortion and promise her that I'll personally adopt and raise her baby should she choose to have it, but I can't do that, and I'm guessing neither can you. Revoking a woman's right to choose is de-humanizing and extremist, and as much as I respect the unborn life inside her, I would rather work to make sure that the majority of babies born are wanted and loved by their willing parents than ensuring that the number of babies born matches up on the tally sheet with the number of women who conceived.

For most people, abortion IS a last resort. And why wouldn't it be? Who would put themselves through that kind of procedure if it wasn't necessary? Choice doesn't mean "abortions for all!" It means that when I'm pregnant, just like when I'm not, I'm the one who decides what to do. Not you, not my neighbours, not the governemnt. Me.

After all, if you can't trust a woman with a choice, how can you trust her with a baby?

 Reply

and, he's not even a southerner to boot! he's a yankee!

 Reply

Of course, I know that 87% of the counties in the US are without abortion services. You're right, that's not 87% of the population--but that hardly matters if one is in need of such services and hasn't the transportation or the means to avail oneself of a constitutionally protected right.

It's only a misleading statistic if it's not clearly labeled as what it is. I credit most of my fellow commenters with enough intelligence to know the difference between the percentage of counties and percentage of people.

If you care to find out what the percentage of women who don't have these services, be my guest. I expect that's it's still pretty high.

 Reply

My guess is that this is a weird, non-sequitor cooked up by the anti-legal-abortion movement. It's like, "Oh my God,

he's a murderer. He's also not forthcoming with some information absolutely not required of him by law."

At the end of the day, don't you think most young girls impregnated by their dads or uncles want that information screamed about them in the local paper? They're already traumatized enough and, presumably, the law is already involved.

 Reply

In Kensington, a section of Philadelphia, an alleged sex criminal was recently beaten by a mob. The middle ground is jail. If our legal system is ineffective, we need more rehabilitation and/or longer sentences. The national database legitimizes vigilantes while victimizing petty criminals with contextless groupings of flashers with serial pederasts.

 Reply

This information is not valuable to argument. It only muddles it, which is the real goal of getting the law passed in the first place.

 Reply

@momof3wildkids: Surely you know that the (non-violent for now) elements of the anti-legal-abortion movement encourage stalking, harassment of both doctors, other workers from clinics, physically trying to block access to clinics and other intimidation tactics as a matter of course, don't you? I mean, it's not all just "let's elect Republicans and hope Jesus overturns Roe v. Wade."

 Reply

except it's probably just some 15 year old girl's boyfriend.

Reproductive rights are about the bodily sovereignty of women and girls, not about crime and punishment.

 Reply

However, if the law is already involved I see no need to put that woman or kid through any additional trauma.

 Reply

We are in agreement that further trauma of the child should be a top priority. I do believe that most if not all states protect the identities of victims of sex crimes that are children. If not, they damn well should.

 Reply

Yikes!

 Reply

I do not want you or anyone who was raped to be victimized again. As I am not a rape survivor, I cannot fathom what you have experienced. What I don't know is this: would you consider it victimization to be asked if you were raped before an abortion? As someone who has not experienced what you have, I would say no -- but I have not walked in your shoes.

 Reply

In my own nirvana, every child who is conceived would be a wanted, valued member of their family. Failing that, those who unfortunately became pregnant without the desire to be, a warm, welcoming and loving family (like Mama P's)would embrace this child as their own. Before you all swarm, I don't want women to be "forced to birth," I just want all children who are conceived to be wanted and loved.

This is not our world. I realize that if Roe v Wade were to be overturned (highly unlikely), abortions would still be carried out and most likely under unsafe conditions. In my heart of hearts, I don't want Roe v Wade overturned. Not because I think it is ok to terminate a pregnancy, because I don't think we have a right to determine if another should cease to exists; but because I don't want to put another life at risk (the woman's) because of unsafe medical conditions.

 Reply

Pro-lifers? You mean forced-birthers, surely.

[wordsmoker.com]

 Reply

We get it.

You're one of the reasonable wackos, and you're righteously indignant.

I don't mind making generalities here. As far as I am concerned, even if you're more moderate, you're still the enemy. Even if you're a halfassed, less dangerous one.

 Reply

This post groups all pro-lifer's with an extreme and very small bunch of whacks who believe it is ok to murder to achieve their pro-life agenda. IMHO, this extreme viewpoint seems very incongruous to a belief that celebrates and highly values life.

 Reply

When someone believes that they can snap their fingers, invoke God and in His name (because God, as we all know, is a man), force a woman to bear children she doesn't want, it's highly disingenuous to assert that most forced-birthers are nice, sweet people who only want the best for abortion doctors. You personally may not want to have an abortion doctor killed, but I doubt you mourned his death very much. And I certainly doubt that you asked where very pregnant women with life-threatening illnesses would go to save their lives. It's not that hard to become an extremist when the whole premise to begin with is that the fetus is more important that the one bearing it.

 Reply

What is most shocking to me is the insidious way that you forced-birthers have chipped away at these legal rights for thousands of women (all across the country in fact) to the point that in MS and AL, it's virtually impossible to obtain an abortion, espcially if you're poor. You, collectively, have harmed many lives with your actions.

P.S. when I write my yearly check $100 for pro-choice I send it specifically to the clinic in MS or AL. I always get a nice thank you letter too.

 Reply

Listen, I have mixed feelings regarding the whole prolife/prochoice ideologies. I support the general gist of a woman having control over her body. I'm not sure when life begins, but I suspect it is before the umbilical cord is cut. As I have said before, since I do not know for sure when life begins, I'd rather err on the side of life.

 Reply

Since we're speaking in generalities anyway, are you among the "pro-life" crowd who are in favor of the death penalty? I've always found that proclivity to be very odd.

 Reply

The actions of a reprehensible few do not represent all.

 Reply

And as far as Muslims go, sure the vast majority of Muslims are neither terrorists nor terrorist-sympathizers. But the extremists control the moderates. And that is what is happening to your movement. You have already lost. You just don't want to admit it.

 Reply

You agree that people who kill abortion-providing doctors are part of the "pro-life" movement? Then stand up and do something about it. Go down to the clinics and protest against them. If every "pro-life" person did this one day out of the year, these nutbags would not be nearly so empowered to take action. Quit making the rest of us do all the dirty work while you sit back on your ass playing canasta, or whatever you women haters do for fun.

 Reply

And, I think you're better served by saying that the whole argument is confusing to you, because that's what it sounds like. If you want to question the ideologies, please do so, but don't stick to one (especially the one with crazy people in it) because it's all mystifying and being "pro-life" sounds good. If you basically believe women should have control over their own bodies, then yes, that would include deciding to have an abortion. And really, beyond women having control over their own bodies, and I ask this question a lot, what does any of this have to do with you personally? How does someone deciding to terminate their pregnancy impact you and your life? I know, I know, the implication, the sheer audacity of someone choosing that their life is more important than having a baby at an inopportune time, which could lead to further poverty and potential hardship and neglect for that child. Yes, this is surely the answer.

 Reply

We won't resolve our differences here. However, I think we can agree that murdering those who perform abortions, any of their staff or families is abhorrent, hateful, and a crime that should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

 Reply

We as a society are obligated to protect those that cannot defend themselves. Various groups are all over the place with respect to when and where a fetus becomes a human life, and which extenuating circumstances affect the legal rights of that human in which ways. There is no clear answer, as it's a metaphysical question. Empirical knowledge can describe the process of conception and growth but it cannot solve the moral dilemma of when all those cells constitute a human being with distinct rights.

I believe that the relationship of necessity between mother and unborn child gives the mother the right to make that decision based on her personal criteria. Those subject to the consequences are entitled to make the decision in ambiguous circumstances. Those of faith should focus on instructing their flocks on the opinions of [insert one or more dieties].

Oh, when you're advocating abortion, tip: hardship, neglect, and poverty are still life and all of its attendant possibilities. Don't be so callous as to dismiss what you deem an undesirable life as a life not worth having. It makes you sound sorta eugenicist, no?

 Reply

Yes, you are entitled to your beliefs on where life begins and I am entitled to mine. I will always put a woman's life ahead of a fetus's, or unborn child's, if you prefer. Because that woman already possesses life--her own--and she must be in COMPLETE control of it. You and your ilk's religious upbringings and your concepts of guilt and shame are your own burden to deal with. Just stay the hell out of other people's way in determining their own fate.

Actually, I believe life begins when you can fix a decent manhattan. Which is why I have been teaching my son how to handle a shaker since age 3.

 Reply

Sorry, but the dynamics of your post annoyed me.

The only thing I will address is your last comment. I don't find it callous to state that included in the various reasons why women choose abortion, many find that at the time they become pregnant they are unable to provide for that child. That's a fact. It's a tough choice, but one made everyday. It's naive to think otherwise. And saying that "to dismiss what you deem an undesirable life as a life not worth having" is an inflammatory statement. Also it again enters the debate of when life begins, but more to the point, it's unrealistic. Many women who terminate a pregnancy go on to have children later when they are better prepared for all that comes with parenthood. For them it is not a mistake, but a choice to do the best for themselves and their children.

 Reply

also, you have blood on your hands.

 Reply

I read that article this morning before heading out the door. I could not, for the life of me, understand their angle.

Also, @Pareene Can we please not make assassination predictions?

 Reply